NEWS: 'Asbo TV': Your Neighbors May Be Watching You

A pilot program in east London will allow Shoreditch residents to subscribe to a new channel monitoring local CCTV cameras. Services will include
on-screen mugshots of suspects wanted by police. Some oppose the new service, citing potential abuses.

news.bbc.co.uk
Civil rights campaigners have voiced concern about a new channel allowing households in east London to monitor local CCTV cameras, dubbed "Asbo
TV".

The project will enable Shoreditch residents to compare suspicious characters with an on-screen "rogue's gallery" from their living-room.

Viewers can then alert police to anyone in breach of an anti-social behaviour order (Asbo) or committing a crime.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I think most Americans forget about the UKs CCTV system. Almost everything is observed.

There is no question that there have been some benefit to the system...

But I think it still makes most people uncomfortable.

Can you imagine how this new service would work? The parallels to "neighbor spying on neighbor" are somewhat disturbing.

While I don't live in the UK I would like to say the USA needs to adopt this. Anti-social behaviour should be criminalized, it doesn't benefit
society, leads to criminal activity in some cases and just generally not needed in today's world.

Nope. I can't get on board with this, and maybe it's my Southern US roots showing, but my first question is... Who defines "anti-social
behaviour"? Is there a handbook where I find out I can play my music at level 8, but if goes up to 9 then I'm in non-compliance with anti-social
behaviour laws? Or is it totally based on neighborhood busy-bodies?

One man's anti-social behaviour is another man's cultural norm. We can't all be the same act the same talk the same walk the same. We've got to
learn to live with each other and if you have an annoying neighbor that makes life hell for the neighborhood, then you have a couple of options. 1) If
they actually do something illegal, report it. Everytime. Complaining to your other neighbor doesn't count as "doing something about it". 2) Move.
3) Deal with it.

My parents had some dope smoking nere-do-wells move in across the street in their little suburban enclave. The neighborhood went ballistic. These
losers were stealing stuff out of garages, throwing loud parties, smoking pot openly on the front porch. Within a year or so one pothead accidently
ran over another pothead causing brain damage and coma, and then they moved on. Darwin took care of what the cops couldn't.

It sorts itself out without the government deciding if we're "nice" enough.

I think most of the people have a bit of a misunderstanding of the term "Anti-Social Behaviour".

Anti Social Behaviour is classed as people who behave...basically, like absolute prats. Urinating in the street, causing fights, causing disorder,
vandalism...All all of these are crimes individually, they come all under the umbrella of anti-social behaviour.

Don't worry kids, you can still wear your Cradle of Filth t-shirt with the offensive slogan on it walk down the street and not be arrested. While an
offence under the Public Order Act, you'd be hard pressed finding a copper willing to drag you in for that.

Look at the flip coin, you get mugged. You report it to the police straight away, CCTV operators have witnessed it and are following the offenders
via the CCTV. The offenders get caught. Sure, you've got a bloody nose, but at least they wont attack anyone else that night, or maybe even
worse.

I'm sure without CCTV even if you reported the incident, the chances of catching the culprits are minimal. Even with good descriptions. What then?
It's all the Police's fault. They don't do enough, their useless, etc.

Where's the happy medium?

The only reason you have to fear CCTV is if your out there doing naughty things. Yeah, have a grumble about it, no-one likes being watched. I'm
sure it's a psychological thing anyway, the CCTV operators aren't following your every move...I know it's hard to believe, but your not *that*
important!

Edit: I really don't see what the probelm is with broadcasting this on a public channel either! Do you object to me watching people watching past
my window where I live? Completely the same principle!

Prod...What about anti social B dealing with the US going it alone in Iraq. I am more worried about what the world neighbors think. why doesn't
aAmerica follow the rules oof international courts and the world body of the UN.
On the average we are already on the average seen on camera 25 times a day in our car, at shopping centers, atm machines, entering businesses, and
camera phones. I am use to it already. Baltimore was one of the first cities to start using cameras in crime and basic monitoring. In LA they have
cameras that follow noise such as gunshots and car crashes.

If they are doing it outside on a public estate, than the people who "own" the CCTV cameras will actually be the residents of the estate so they
will do it through a loop hole.

Should this happen? Well to be honest, ASBO's are a joke. I've been threatened four maybe more times with one for doing nothing, being drunk in
public and stumbling over was one of them. The last one was a case of me and my friends rapping/beat boxing outside a local store, while one of my
friends went in to get some smokes. We got in nobodies way, caused no hassle and because they were rapping/beat boxing, he told us we were being
anti-social.

Odium, what your describing is not anti-social behaviour. You and your friends sounds like completely normal teenagers.

People tend to spurt out crap such as that, "that's anti-social behaviour" when nothing of the sort is happening.

If you were constantly hassassing people coning out of the shop, swearing, acting in a threating manner, throuwing bottles arounds...That's a
completely different matter.

Edit: On the Data Protection act, it doesn't apply as it's a public place. The only thing that could apply is the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act (RIPA)...However that only applies for goverment bodies. In this case, the estate is seen as a private body and therefore would not
apply

I'm a Law Student, I know what is and isn't Anti-Social behaviour the problem is, 12 to 15 year old kids do not. The Police use ASBO's as a almost
fear tactic, that has no backfired. You can buy the ASBO papers on the internet and have your naem put on it - kids think they are a joke and worse
yet they are not solving the problem.

The Government needs to invest in giving children something to do, in my area for a while we had free classes on Djing, Break Dancing and so on and so
fourth with minor local funding but the Council wouldn't fund us even though we had a massive reduction in crime. These kids are so bored on these
inner-city estates and so poor they end up hanging around street corners and begin to get treated like criminals even when they are innocent.

The problem won't be solved with ASBO's or CCTV, CCTV doesn't pink up criems unless they are foolish enough to do it around them and normally they
just move on to where their are no cameras and if they can't do that they cover their faces up and know the estates better than the Police do.

Also, why make the antisocial behavior of ordinary individuals a federal criminal offense when so many "leaders," corporations' and governments'
behaviors are so antisocial that they verge on psychopathic - but are not indictable?

Odium, The threat of an ASBO, by the Police or otherwise (can be any public body, eg. Fire Service, NHS, MoD), for behaviour you have described is
literally that. A threat.

You as a Law Student should know the amount of evidence gathering it takes before an ASBO, CRASBO or ABC are even considered possible by the
submitting body and even then it has to be passed by a magistrate.

Behaviour Orders are not given out lightly, however, the threats are. And that's all they are, threats.

Soficrow, bit of a massive knee jerk reation there I think. And where did all this talk of "Federal" business come into it? Last time I checked,
this was in reference to the British use of CCTV and Behaviour Orders?

Good job you don't know about the common law arrestable power of "Breach of the Peace"...You'd get your knickers in a right twist over that one!!!

FactoryLad, the problem is a lot of this kids do not under-stand their rights. I've before in a Cell not had my rights listened to and when I kicked
up a fuss they droped the charges on me.

The problem is, a lot of children especailly 12 to 15 year olds plead guilty because they believe what they did was a crime, when in fact it wasn't
and a lot of Magistrates are...well useless at their job. They have basic training, no understanding of the problem and tend to come from areas with
enough money to have no knowledge of why these children are doing it.

I know people who have been assaulted by Police Officers in my town, I know at least two magistrates who have over a 90% conviction rate. The legal
system in the U.K. is good, but not as good as it should be. The money wasted in the Courts due to ASBO's, money wasted on the Police Force could
have gone on keeping this children off of the streets and being productive...instead they waste their time.

I think you'll find if you or someone else has been arrested it's because you have been suspected, have committed or are about to commit a crime.

So when you say, these kids admit to committing a crime which they haven't done, I find it pretty hard to believe. Especially as an under 18 MUST
have an appropriate adult with them in interview along with a solicitor or legal representative (free of charge) if they choose too. The solicitor
would TELL them what to say in interview. If the solicitor wasn't happy with the conduct of the interview or the officers questions, they can voice
their concerns. The appropriate adult can as well.

I find it very hard to believe young people immediately admit to offences in interview when they have not done them.

The only other thing I can think of is that the solicitor has advised them to admit the alleged offence to push for a caution...And that's if
they've admitted it to the solicitor in confidence or the evidence is overwhelming that they've done it!

As with the assualt PC allegations. Police officers are allowed to use reasonable force to detain people when under arrest. If you start kicking off
and wont come quietly, they can use reasonable force. I.e. you start kicking out at people, you'll get thrown on the floor and cuffed. End of.

If officers are going around punching people in the face for no reason, that's a different story.

Factorylad - It's about bypassing the criminal justice system entirely, and putting the power to determine guilt and levy punishments (fines)
directly into the hands of the police, on the street. Just like it works in places like Mexico and Brazil for example.

What happens is the police stop people and threaten sanctions, then the people who can pay their bribe and the ones who can't cough up
go to jail. Simple and effective. Just like fascism.

For example, (in the past) somebody spitting at an old lady in the street would not be prosecuted because it used too much police time and the only
result was a fine.

Mr Blair accepted that on-the-spot fines for some offences reversed the principle that people were innocent until proven guilty but said in reality
such summary powers were needed.

Factory have you been handled inappropriately by the police before? I find it hard to believe that you think the cops are always right in dealing with
these kinds of cases. There has to be some mistakes and pre-judged events. Not most but some. I have been verbally assaulted by cops in DC for looking
at them.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.